Obasanjo

Obasanjo: A re-reading

Jideofor Adibe, Ph.D.

Obasanjo, a popular hate-figure, has once again been boxed into a corner, painted as a bugaboo and turned into a media punching bag. This is an episodic thing. Obasanjo’s utterances have powerful echoes, which often wake up his army of critics.

In far away Geneva, Switzerland, Obasanjo claimed on Wednesday June 15 2011 that his successors in office have lacked the spine to fight corruption. Speaking during a debate organised by Club de Madrid on ‘Meeting Sustainable Societies and Social Justice’, Obasanjo reportedly took a swipe on the Jonathan regime (without mentioning anyone by name) by saying that he had not seen ‘persistency and consistency’ in the fight against corruption ‘because the people that are involved in corruption, they are strongly entrenched and unless you are ready to confront them at the point of giving your life for it, then you will give in, that is the end of it’ (Daily Trust, June 16 2011).

There have been several angry reactions by Nigerians, including from Senators, over the statement, with some referring to him as one of the most corrupt living Nigerians while others questioned his patriotism or reminded him that he had more opportunity than anyone else to fix the country - but blew it! Welcome to the temple of the familiar – Obasanjo as a hate figure.

In an article in September 2007 (‘Obasanjo: Beyond the demonisation’) I opined that criticisms of Obasanjo “are grossly overdone, without due recognition for his achievements. I believe that despite Obasanjo’s obvious failures and personal weaknesses, he remains the greatest Nigerian leader to date.” I received serious flaks for that article, including from my brothers. But reading through that article again, I find nothing to change my conviction.

I have always been very fascinated by the Obasanjo character. As a younger man in the late 1980s, I had accompanied the political activist and publisher Chief Arthur Nwankwo to one of the nocturnal meetings at Obasanjo’s Ota Farm. It was my first and only encounter with the Ota farmer. But I was very impressed. I recall he was wearing a rather cheap trousers, his shirt was wrongly buttoned and he was walking around bare feet. His Raleigh (or so it seemed) bicycle leaned against the wall of the modest one storey building in the farm. I was just too full of admiration for a former Head of State that embodied such simplicity. Over the years I have been both his ardent critic and a passionate admirer of some of his attributes. True, when Obasanjo shaved off his trademark moustache and exchanged the simple shirts and trousers for which he was known for expensive agbadas, Rolex watches and designer glasses, something of the old Obasanjo seemed to have died in those transformations.

But why is Obasanjo such an easily loathed figure?

The Zik complex

Virtually every group seems to have a grouse against Obasanjo. Remarkably he appears to be more loathed by his Yoruba brethren than by any other ethnic group. I believe that one explanation for this is what could be called the ‘Zik complex’. My personal opinion is that Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, (who together with Herbert Macaulay, his mentor, are undoubtedly the fathers of Nigerian nationalism), appeared to be unduly concerned with preserving his image as a ‘detribalised’ Africanist/nationalist. Like Zik, Obasanjo often openly distanced himself from the known political positions of his fellow Yorubas (such as their massive support for Awo’s presidential aspirations in 1979 or helping to destroy the AD, seen then as a reincarnation of the UPN and Action Group) perhaps in the belief that such contrarian positions would enhance his nationalist credentials. One of the consequences is that while, like Zik, he may have surreptitiously promoted the interest of his ethnic group in many ways, members of his in-group remain suspicious of him and even fail to see his effort in promoting their interest.

There is also the issue of the soldier in him, which sometimes results in a less refined, ‘roforofo’ approach to issues and an instinctive attraction to ‘fearless’ men and women who use garrison commander tactics (Chris Uba and the late Adedibu for instance).

Obasanjo either does not know how to, or believe in building constituencies of support. Take his relationship with the Igbos. As far as the ethnic arithmetic of ‘who gets what’, is concerned, my opinion is that the Igbos did very well under him. For instance at a point in the regime, the Governor of the Central Bank, Finance Minister and Chief economic Adviser to the president were all Igbos, and one of his closest aides was an Igbo! (whether these positions benefited the ethnic group is not relevant here). But despite this empowerment, few Igbos (or other ethnic nationalities for that matter), seem to have kind things to say about him - not least because of the mayhem he was suspected to have encouraged in Anambra state. Again no regime in our political history empowered women as much as Obasanjo did. But how many women come to his defence in his episodic political crucifixion?

I concede that Obasanjo’s critics are mostly right: Obasanjo is a hypocrite who is adept in seeing the speck in others’ eyes but not the plank in his own; he could be vindictive and ruthless, he cannot be trusted to keep agreements or even be truthful about the existence of such agreements.

But do all these weaknesses and others obviate the following: Obasanjo’s capacity for working long hours, his boundless energy and his courage? No sane person judges the weather only by its inclement side. Obasanjo was said to be in Copenhagen when he got wind that Abacha was planning to rope him in a phantom coup. He reportedly ignored persuasions by the Danish government not to return to Nigeria and was duly arrested by Abacha’s regime on arrival. It was an uncommon display of courage. Again though he wasn’t particularly a fan of Abiola and was said to be in far away Washington DC when the June 12 election was annulled, Obasanjo again reportedly quickly returned to the country and called a meeting of former Heads of State. He was said to have asked the then Labour leader, Paschal Bafyau to call out workers on strike to make the country ungovernable for Babangida. How many of our past leaders take such courageous decisions? Most turn pacifist with any regime in power to protect their underbellies from being exposed. Unlike many leaders who feel threatened or abandon their aides in the face of harsh public criticisms of a policy, Obasanjo would give political cover to an aide irrespective of the level of public criticisms. Controversial and extremely tough decisions like Soludo’s bank consolidation or El Rufai’s pulling down of ‘illegal structures’ to restore the Abuja master plan were pushed through only because there was an Obasanjo who provided the political cover. True, Obasanjo can set up any of his trusted aides for humiliation on a whim. But this cannot remove the fact that he has that single-minded devotion to a cause he believes in. And the nation needs that quality in any leader that genuinely desires to transform this country.

And who by the way is the folksiest President the country has ever produced? How many Nigerian leaders have that common touch to ‘blow’ Pidgin English? As President, there were tales of how he would stop by the roadside to buy cobs of corn or how he would order his convoy to pull up for him to face a bush, pull up his agbada and bring out his ‘thing’ to answer the call of nature – like any other ordinary blue collar worker. Add to these his comic nature. There were tales of how he would come out of his car to dance for people hauling abuses at him. Certainly Obasanjo is not a saint and his numerous sins have been well documented. But I do not see him as a devil’s incarnate. A Machiavellian octopus, with a peculiar capacity to do good and evil in equal measure, will be closer to capturing the essence of the Obasanjo enigma. And are most of us not really like him, with the difference being only a matter of degree?